↓ Skip to main content

The Lp_3561 and Lp_3562 Enzymes Support a Functional Divergence Process in the Lipase/Esterase Toolkit from Lactobacillus plantarum

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Microbiology, July 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
34 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The Lp_3561 and Lp_3562 Enzymes Support a Functional Divergence Process in the Lipase/Esterase Toolkit from Lactobacillus plantarum
Published in
Frontiers in Microbiology, July 2016
DOI 10.3389/fmicb.2016.01118
Pubmed ID
Authors

María Esteban-Torres, Inés Reverón, Laura Santamaría, José M. Mancheño, Blanca de las Rivas, Rosario Muñoz

Abstract

Lactobacillus plantarum species is a good source of esterases since both lipolytic and esterase activities have been described for strains of this species. No fundamental biochemical difference exists among esterases and lipases since both share a common catalytic mechanism. L. plantarum WCFS1 possesses a protein, Lp_3561, which is 44% identical to a previously described lipase, Lp_3562. In contrast to Lp_3562, Lp_3561 was unable to degrade esters possessing a chain length higher than C4 and the triglyceride tributyrin. As in other L. plantarum esterases, the electrostatic potential surface around the active site in Lp_3561 is predicted to be basic, whereas it is essentially neutral in the Lp_3562 lipase. The fact that the genes encoding both proteins were located contiguously in the L. plantarum WCFS1 genome, suggests that they originated by tandem duplication, and therefore are paralogs as new functions have arisen during evolution. The presence of the contiguous lp_3561 and lp_3562 genes was studied among L. plantarum strains. They are located in a 8,903 bp DNA fragment that encodes proteins involved in the catabolism of sialic acid and are predicted to increase bacterial adaptability under certain growth conditions.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 34 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 34 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 7 21%
Researcher 7 21%
Student > Bachelor 3 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 6%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 6%
Other 4 12%
Unknown 9 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 14 41%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 15%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 3%
Chemical Engineering 1 3%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 3%
Other 1 3%
Unknown 11 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 18 November 2016.
All research outputs
#17,810,867
of 22,880,230 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Microbiology
#17,250
of 24,902 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#264,549
of 363,120 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Microbiology
#341
of 486 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,880,230 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 24,902 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.3. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 363,120 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 486 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.